Thank you all, but one more question

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

It all worked out fine with the ISO settings and Shutterspeeds, thanks alot.

But why do the pictures on the LCD look very very bright while on the PC they are very dark and muddy.

It can all be fixed with a little curves in ps7.0 but it puzzles me.

a few shots with the new settings, shot on 800ISO 1/4000 sec and ISO800 1/2000sec.

http://www.webphotoforum.com/user_images//L/33392.jpg

http://www.webphotoforum.com/user_images/1949/N/33396.jpg

http://www.webphotoforum.com/user_images//L/33397.jpg

http://www.webphotoforum.com/user_images//L/33398.jpg

I'm beginning to REALLY love the 10D, it's so fast and easy to handle.
Thanks again.

Greetings,
Frank

[daveh]

There's not a lot to go on here. Some possibilities:

LCD brightness setting
LCD viewing angle
Monitor settings
Color management settings
Wrong color space

In general, it's tricky to use an LCD to judge exposure. I use the LCD image to check composition and use the histogram to check exposure.

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

I use standard color settings RGB.
Also in windows I use standard colorsettings profile, and the pictures here look like it was (very very bright weather).

It's not dramatic, but when looking at the shots straight from the camera 50% is way underexpossed and 50% is a bit (10-30%) underexpossed.

However nothing is wrong with it because you can quit easily fix it in PS.

The problem is more diskspace ;D.
I have one map unworked straight from the camera and one map worked on, it would be nice to get them correctly from the camera.

But again it's no biggy.
I'm rather happy with the outcome, and one advance is that there are almost never blownout parts.

Greetings,
Frank

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

Forgot to mention, it looks like a gamma problem, like the camera outputs in gamma 1.0 and it should be 2.2.

Maybe that helps ?

Greetings,
Frank

[daveh]

J.A.F. Doorhof wrote:
Forgot to mention, it looks like a gamma problem, like the camera outputs in gamma 1.0 and it should be 2.2.


Are you using a linear conversion?

Also, are you compensating for difficult situations when shooting? For example, one of your pics was a white bird in the sky. I would expect that to underexpose if not compensated.

[Motorsports Photo]

I just got my 10D and noticed the same thing. The LCD is MUCH brighter than the image really is. Check that histogram! Its the only way to make sure your pics come out right. I've had to make a half stop underexposure to get mine right.

Thanks to previous posters on this "problem" so I didn't have 3 days worth of badly overexposed pics with my new 10D.

-PS

[Longwatcher]

I have noted that the LCD on both my D60 and 10D tend to do some form of correction to underexposed pictures so they look better (which makes them look lighter). Then when I get home and download the images they show up underexposed (dark and muddy) on my PC.

I suspect it is some form of correction by the LCD display software and I positively do not trust the image on the LCD for exposer any more. I tend to use the histogram display instead since that gives me a more accurate picture of where my exposure really is at.

without knowing what your aperture was at, the shutter speed you were at is such that it might be close to the limit of some lenses (like my 75-300/4-5.6 IS for example). which is why I am guessing probably slightly underexposed, which is actually good for a digital camera.

Just my experience,

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

Hi,

What is meant with linear conversion ?
I use a card reader for the CF although the software thinks it's the 10D.

The aperture was arround 9-15 I believe.
It's not a real problem for me, as long as it can be corrected.

The softness of the lens IS a problem for me, I would love to have supercrisp pictures, but my budget is gone for this month.

would going down to 1/2000 or 1/1000 make the picture more snappy/crisp ?

Also the metering (this puzzles me beyond your imagination).
I use the 0 at the moment, meaning measuring in the middle only. Would (*) be better (whole scene) or [ ] measuring middle + scene.

Greetings,
Frank

Again SORRY for the many questions, normally I'm not used to asking, only answering ;-).

[daveh]

J.A.F. Doorhof wrote:
What is meant with linear conversion ?


Well it means a gamma of 1.0. It's an option on most RAW converters. Since you said it looked like a gamma of 1.0, I went for the obvious ;)

Faster shutter speeds will help on motion blur but not lens softness. (It's worth a shot since the two sometimes look similar.)

On metering, you want to measure the "important" or "18% gray" part of the picture. That varies of course. Just remember that the meter like any other aims for 18% gray. If you point it at white, you get 18% gray. If you point it at black you get 18% gray. The camera relies on you to know something is SUPPOSED to be white or black and compensate.

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

Hi,

I shoot in the LARGE JPEG setting, not raw.

The 18% gray option puzzles me.
I thought the measuring was to get the colortemp correct and exposure.

So when I want to shoot small objects against a bright sky I have to choose metering from the center, when I take a bright object against a dull sky I have to take whole measuring.

Greetings,
Frank

[daveh]

J.A.F. Doorhof wrote:
So when I want to shoot small objects against a bright sky I have to choose metering from the center, when I take a bright object against a dull sky I have to take whole measuring.


You may want to change metering patterns, but to be clear I was suggesting exposure compensation (and/or exposure locking.) These are three different things.

[runic]

longwatcher wrote:
I have noted that the LCD on both my D60 and 10D tend to do some form of correction to underexposed pictures so they look better (which makes them look lighter). Then when I get home and download the images they show up underexposed (dark and muddy) on my PC.

I've noticed exactly the same with the LCD on my Canon G2. It often boosts the brightness of underexposed shots. They look stunning on the LCD but in reality need assistance from Curves in Photoshop.

Guess it's just a product of the way LCD images are artificially brightened so they are more visible on the screen in daylight.

Regards
Martin
http://photos.runic.com

[Longwatcher]

J.A.F. Doorhof wrote:
The softness of the lens IS a problem for me, I would love to have supercrisp pictures, but my budget is gone for this month.

would going down to 1/2000 or 1/1000 make the picture more snappy/crisp ?


Just to confirm, you are using unsharp mask in PS7.0, yes? If not this is a necessary function to get sharp/crisp pictures. Note that sometimes I find I have to use edge sharpen or just plain sharpen to get the sharpness I desire in an image. The images come out inherently slightly soft from the 10D. If you are, then it is probably the lens.

Based on depth of field I had guessed that your aperture was around 4 or 5.6 for the skiers, but then that was only a guess on my part.

The only advantage of slowing down the shutter would be a bit more light will get to the sensor, which may improve dynamic range a bit, but not significantly. It probably will not affect crispness very much. It might however add a little more effect to the image since the water will be in motion more, while the skier should still be caught still.

Just my opinions and I am slightly out of my league here as I don't do moving targets very often.

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

Hi,

I use USM alot, to much sometimes for my taste.
I use the highlightes way and the midtones workflow.

I will open a new topic concerning the lens.

Greetings,
Frank